Islam And Peace

Blessed month of Ramadan

2009-08-31T22:38:00.000-07:00

Blessed month of Ramadan

Summary of Friday Sermon
Delivered by Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad at, the Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community
August 28 th, 2009

NOTE: Alislam Team takes full responsibility for any errors or miscommunication in this Synopsis of the Friday Sermon

* Huzur cited verse 187 of Surah Al Baqarah, the translation reads, ‘And when My servants ask thee about Me, say: ‘I am near. I answer the prayer of the supplicant when he prays to Me. So they should hearken to Me and believe in Me, that they may follow the right way.’ (2:187)

* Huzur said it is an immense favour of God that we are experiencing yet another blessed month of Ramadan and today with His grace and His grace alone we are going through the sixth day of fasting.

* When God states in Surah Al Ankabut, ‘And as for those who strive in Our path — We will surely guide them in Our ways. And verily Allah is with those who do good’ (29:70) it signifies that He accepts those who endeavour for His nearness.

* It has been the way of God from time immemorial that He sent His Prophets in every age who guided people on the paths that led to Him. When mankind, having gone through evolution, reached a stage of spiritual maturity, God sent the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be on him) to this world with the perfect religious law (Shariah) so that mankind may set forth on the ways that leads to God.

* One of these ways and means, is Ramadan. The verses preceding the aforementioned verse (2:187) mention that God had prescribed fasting on earlier people, just as it is prescribed to Muslims now. As Islam is the perfect religion, it expounds the details of fasting in a most excellent manner.

* The Holy Qur’an clearly states the conditions under which one may not fast, for example when ailing or travelling. The missed fasts should be made up later on. If one can, one may also give fidya (expiation). People with chronic illnesses should pay fidya.

* This is a most blessed month and minor ailments should not be made an excuse to miss fasting. During the month of Ramadan God puts special arrangements in place for forgiveness of sins.

* In verse 29:70 the word Sobolona (in Our ways) signifies that the grace is for anyone who makes an endeavour with purity of intention. However, a special beneficence has been made available for those who make sacrifices during the month of Ramadan to attain nearness to God. He creates an atmosphere in this month which facilitates attaining piety. He brings closer all the remote ways of acceptance of prayer.

* Hadith relates that during Ramadan God opens the door to Paradise and shuts down the doors leading to Hell and restrains Satan. Huzur said what an excellent illustration the Hadith gives of the grace of Ramadan. Is it then not our utter good fortune to be experiencing the grace of yet another Ramadan.

* Satan has been given free rein and many pious people are deceived by him. At times he leads people to badness through apparent piety. However, in the aforementioned Hadith the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be on him) having been informed by God, declared that during Ramadan Satan is restrained as are his accomplices.

* Thus we have an opportunity to benefit from the spirituality of this month and enter Paradise from as many doors as we can. Try and reach those heights where Satan dare not reach and then make an effort to make what we have attained a part of our life.

* Try and emulate the blessed model of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be on him) in worship of God, in alms-giving etc. these are tremendous sources of attaining nearness to God. To abide by the commandments of the Holy Qur’an is also a source of attaining God’s pleasure. Fortunate will we be if we tried and gained maximum benefit from these special blessings of the month.

* One Hadith relates that God states every deed of son of man is for himself apart from fasting. God states, ‘fasting is for Me’. The Hadith goes on to relate that fasting is like a shield. If someone tries to quarrel with one who is fasting, his response should be simply; ‘I am fasting’. Hadith also relates that there are two delights for man; one when he opens his fast and the other when he meets his Lord and his Lord will be pleased with him for his fasting.

* Huzur said our fasts should be such that until we depart from this world they should make all we do be pleasing to God and thus take us closer to Him. A person who fasts without fulfilling the requisites of fasting, upon meeting his Maker, will not be a substantiation of what the Hadith states, i.e. God will be pleased with him for his fasting. God does not need a person to give up his food and drink if he does not forsake falsehood during Ramadan.

* Huzur said all sorts of people inhabit this world. There are those who fast but kill people, there are those who fast but consider persecuting Ahmadis a meritorious task. Huzur remarked, is Paradise opened up for these as it is opened for those who do good? Will these be protected from Hell just as the virtuous are protected from Hell and those whose satans are restrained? Huzur said had the satans of these perpetrators been restricted how could they do the satanic deeds? Indeed this matter is conditional. During Ramadan, God will facilitate arrangement which will be enhanced from ordinary days for one who will endeavour in the way of God. It is therefore important that we benefit from this special facility and turn to Him ever more to seek His grace.

* God has preserved the glad-tiding in the Holy Qur’an by placing the verse 2:187 amidst the commandments for fasting and thus given the tiding of acceptance of prayers. God has also mentioned some conditions therein, along with mentioning nearness to Him and acceptance of prayers. By stating ‘My servants’ He has made it clear that this beneficence is not just for anyone but is for those who wish to become servants of God and those who are His servants. Whose each deed is an expression of ‘Thee alone do we worship and Thee alone do we implore for help’ (1:5) When they pray their prayer is not worldly, but it is to seek God (2:187). Their angst is to find God, they are restless to seek Him. While the world is inclined towards atheism, they have only one desire and that is to attain sufficient spiritual knowledge to combat any worldly temptation that may test their faith and for this, they fast during Ramadan.

* Those who are Muslims and endeavour to become Muslims in the true sense of the word are the ones God assures in the verse (2:187) that He is near and He listens to the prayer of the supplicant and He answers.

* Huzur said if a sequence of questions and answers [with God] is to be initiated then one has to seek God with absolute sincerity. One has to abide by all the commandments of the Holy Qur’an and have deep love for the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be on him). One also has to have allegiance to the Imam of the age.

* For this, one may not devise one’s own definition of perfect faith, rather needs to adopt the way that God and His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be on him) have taught. God states in 2:187 that belief in Him is made possible when people hearken to Him and this in turn will be when all the commandments of the Holy Qur’an are abided by. It will come to pass when the rights due to God and the rights due to mankind are both being fulfilled. If some of these dues are being honoured and not others then one may not be termed a muttaqi (righteous).

* Huzur said during this Ramadan we should try and worship God with complete sincerity. We should develop a good understanding of Unity of God and honour it and we should honour Salat.

* Huzur said he is amazed and concerned when people say that they try but cannot quite manage the five daily Salat. Huzur said when we miss [something as fundamental as] Salat how can we supplicate for acceptance of our prayers. Similarly one needs to pray with one’s heart and soul to adopt high morals.

* Ramadan is a source to attain high standards of spirituality and should be fully availed of. We should try and enter Paradise through all the doors that are opened. This is a most special month of acceptance of prayer and the greatest prayer is when God’s nearness is sought, communion with Him is prayed for. When one finds God all of one’s other wishes and desires are taken care of.

* Huzur prayed that may God grant us the spiritual cognisance that would unfold the reality of prayer to us as well as the philosophy of attaining communion with Him. May each deed of ours be pleasing to Him. May we acquire the change which comes to pass by virtue of prayers made during Ramadan through which God comes near, a change that will distinguish us from others.

* May God keep the Community safe against all evil. May He enable us to pray abundantly and bring about pious changes in ourselves and may we attain His communion.

Next, Huzur paid tribute to Maulana Dost Muhammad Shahid sahib who passed away on 26 August ’09. He was a high ranking scholar of the Community, may God continue to elevate his status. He was referred to as the ‘Historian of Ahmadiyyat’ as he had penned the history of the Community of which twenty volumes have been published, while work on the Fifth Khilafat was in progress. Huzur said he was not simply an historian; rather his life was a chapter of the history of Ahmadiyyat. He was a luminary who was ever ready to spread Ahmadiyyat, the true Islam. He had an incredible memory. Huzur said it would not be out of place to say that he was an encyclopaedic person. In fact, Huzur said, Hadhrat Khalifatul Masih IV (may Allah have mercy on him) did indeed make this observation. Huzur said he retained extensive information on the lives of early saints and mujaddad (reformers) to the point of remembering the name of the relevant book and the page number where certain information was.

Huzur said he would make only a few observations from his many personal qualities. He was a most selfless person who spent most of his time in the way of serving religion. He was a life-devotee who had an intense connection with Khilafat. He was an extremely pious and prayerful person but whenever people requested him to pray for them he would say ‘do not ask me, write to Khalifa of the time.’ He was utterly humble. Huzur said every time he read something new he sent Huzur a photo-copy of the material. He deserves to be referred to as a scholar who practised his scholarship. Huzur said it is natural to be concerned at the passing away of such great obliging associates but one prays that God will always provide us with great, obliging associates.

Khilafat was always the axis of his thoughts and he maintained that once the Khalifa of the time had said something there was no need to look elsewhere. Huzur said the Ameer sahib of Saudi Arabia wished to write the history of the Jama’at there. It was suggested to him to visit Maulana who collated all the information for him within half an hour. Huzur said he was the champion of references. Someone once went to his office to ask for some help with a reference. The person picked up a pen and paper from Maulana’s desk and started making notes. Maulana took the pen and paper back and said as the person had come for a personal reason, he should use his own material.

Huzur related an incident from his life where someone arranged for him to travel in a rickshaw. On the return trip he ensured that a taxi was arranged and paid for was his entitlement. Huzur said exercising one’s entitlement also signifies obedience and he was always aware of maintaining the dignity of the scholars of the Community.

He received his early education from Madrassa Ahmadiyya, Qadian, and then joined the Jami’a. He obtained a Maulwi Fazal degree from the Punjab University. He served the Community for sixty three years. He was asked by the Khalifa of the time to write the history of Ahmadiyyat in 1953. He leaves behind one son, Dr. Sultan Mubasher sahib, who works at the Fazl e Umer hospital and five daughters. He wrote a research article on Jama’at e Islami in 1951 under the guidance of Hadhrat Musleh Maud (may Allah be pleased with him). He has over forty publications.

When Hadhrat Khalifatul Masih III (may Allah have mercy on him) went to the National Assembly of Pakistan in 1974, Maulana was a member of the delegation that accompanied Huzur. He was the last surviving member of that delegation. His responsibility at the National Assembly was to look for information and references and he amazed members of the Assembly with his efficiency. He was an honorary member of the Majlis e Shura Pakistan, an appointment that Khalifa of the time makes, till the end. In 1992, he was awarded ‘Man of the Year’ by an international institution of Cambridge, UK, ‘International Biographical Centre’. This award is given to scholarly persons. In 1982 he also experienced imprisonment for a few days in the way of God. In 1988, he was imprisoned in Gujaranwala District Jail. He continued to give Dars ul Qur’an in the Jail and also did Tabligh. During imprisonment he had to do hard labour, but this fact was only disclosed after his release.

He was engaged day and night in serving religion. If he was given a task by the Khalifa of the time, regardless of time of the day, he would immediately start working on it and did not stop until the task was complete. He would say that he was the soldier of the Khalifa of the time and a soldier never leaves his trenches. He had no concept of taking time off. A few days prior to passing away he dreamed that Dr. Abdus Salam said ‘Assalamoalaikum’ to him. At the time of every concern/distress he would say, ‘write to the Khalifa of the time, give alms and do Istaghfar in abundance.’ He had eight thousand books in his personal library. He used to say that a representative of the Community should be mindful of his dignity and take care of his appearance. He never complained about anything.

Once Hadhrat Khalifatul Masih III (may Allah have mercy on him) called for him but he could not be found anywhere. When he arrived for Asr Salat, Huzur asked him where had he been. He replied that he was in the library. The library had been locked from outside, so he had scaled a wall to get inside. He could not afford a bicycle and would walk everywhere until 1979, when the Community provided him with a bicycle. He would sit in assemblies of the Khalifa of the time with his head bowed and would say this was how Hadhrat Khalifatul Masih I (may Allah be pleased with him) sat in the august company of the Promised Messiah (on whom be peace). One day he came home most excited and on asking said that he had been with Hadhrat Khalifatul Masih III (may Allah have mercy on him) and Huzur left the room for a short while when he spotted Huzur’s shoes and had the opportunity to wipe the shoes clean with his handkerchief. Huzur said someone has rightly written about him that tasks for which organisations are formed in the world, this person did by alone. Huzur said such was his dedication to work that his children would not see him for months as he left home while they slept and returned while they slept.

Huzur said an incident of his life has significant counsel for all life-devotees. In 1965, on the first Friday of the Third Khilafat, Hadhrat Khalifatul Masih III (may Allah have mercy on him) called him and said that although Friday was a day off he had unconvinced Maulana. Maulana said it was very pleasing that he was called. Hadhrat Khalifatul Masih III (may Allah have mercy on him) said that he had called Maulana because when Huzur had filled the form for life-devotion and presented it to Hadhrat Musleh Maud (may Allah be pleased with him) he said that he had fulfilled his secret desire by devoting his life. He had added that he should remember that now that his life was devoted, he had no time off till his death. Maulana told Huzur that he too pledged that he would work day and night for the cause of faith.

Huzur said even while he was hospitalised (for the last time), he would say that he should be discharged as a lot of work given by the Khalifa of the time awaited him. He thus honoured his pledge till the very end. May God elevate his status and enable his children to follow in his footsteps. May God enable his son, Dr. Sultan Mubasher sahib to fulfil his life-devotion in the real sense.

Huzur said he would lead the funeral Prayer in absentia of Maulana along with two others; Maulana’s younger brother Muhammad Aslam sahib, who passed away an hour after Maulana’s death. He was a Moosi and a devoted member of the Community. Naseem Begum sahiba, wife of Bashir Ahmad sahib of Sargodha and mother of our missionary Arif Bashir sahib who is currently serving in Tanzania. She was a Moosia. May God elevate the station of all the deceased and fulfil the pious desires they had for their offspring.

AHMADI MUSLIM LEADER WELCOMED IN GLASGOW

2009-04-07T19:30:00.000-07:00

PRESS RELEASE
AHMADI MUSLIM LEADER WELCOMED IN GLASGOW

The Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat, Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad was last night welcomed to the city of Glasgow by the Lord Provost, Councillor Robert Winter. In honour of His Holiness visiting the city, a Civic Reception was held at the beautiful City Chambers located in the heart of Glasgow city centre. The Chambers were opened in 1888 by Queen Victoria.The event was attended by over 200 guests including numerous politicians and localdignitaries.

Upon arrival at the Chambers, His Holiness was welcomed by the Lord Provost. During a
meeting in his office, Councillor Winter spoke about how the region had always
maintained a distinguished position in developing politicians who were influential at anational level.Upon invitation His Holiness left a message for the people of Glasgow in the Official Visitors Book in which he congratulated the Lord Provost and the people of Scotland for their ‘community consciousness’ and their ‘open mindedness’.
The Reception itself was held in the Banquet Hall. The Lord Provost used his opening
remarks to welcome His Holiness to Glasgow and also to recognise the contribution made by the local Ahmadiyya community. He said:
“I am delighted to welcome you all. I realise that the presence of Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad in this city makes this occasion very special... Local Ahmadis are extremely valued and respected in Glasgow. We celebrate your commitment to peaceful dialogue.”
Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad used his address to comment upon many topical issues
that are facing the world today including the global financial crisis and misconceptions of Islam in the West.
His Holiness began his address by speaking of his role as the worldwide spiritual leader of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat. He said the purpose of his role was two-fold. Firstly, to lead mankind towards God Almighty and secondly to encourage all peoples to live side by side, discharging each other’s rights fairly and without prejudice.
Commenting upon social issues such as increasing crime rates he said that it was too easy to blame such issues on increased immigration. He said:
“Let it be very clear that this rise is due to being far removed from God and the nonfulfilment of one’s (personal) requirements. That is the cause of this restlessness.”
The removal of such angst could only be done through the development of an equal
society whereby each person respected the rights of their fellow humans and the law at large. Such respect was dependent upon a just society.
His Holiness spoke about how during the recent past the world has developed to such an extent that it was now possible to refer to the entire world as a ‘global village’. Such advances in technology had been prophesised in the Holy Qur’an over 1400 years ago. The world ought to have used such development as a means of fostering mutual relations; however this has not been the case. He said:
“Despite the facilities of communication which should have brought people together,
walls of hatred have been erected and hearts are being distanced from each other.”
Thereafter His Holiness spoke about the current global financial crisis. He said that in Western countries members of the public were becoming disillusioned because
government Defence budgets were ever increasing, yet military interventions were a
major cause of collapsed economies. Individuals throughout the world were feeling the
effects of the economic downturn; many faced unemployment and increased living costs.
His Holiness said that such a downturn could only be arrested through the development of a just system of governance and that for fairness and equity to prevail it was necessary that mankind turned towards God Almighty. He said:
“In summary, what I wish to say is that peace depends on justice, and economic progress depends on peace. This will only happen when man recognises his Creator. And only then will the rights of God’s Creation be discharged.”
Following the address of Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad a number of local politicians and dignitaries took to the stage. Each commented upon the values upheld by local members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat and its longstanding contribution to the local society at large.

End of Release
Further Info: Abid Khan (press@ahmadiyya.org.uk) (44) 07795490682
http://alislam.org/press-release/Glasgow.March.09.pdf

Brutal Murder Of Pakistani Ahmadi

2009-04-07T19:13:00.000-07:00

PRESS RELEASE

BRUTAL MURDER OF AHMADI HUBSAND AND WIFE IN PAKISTAN

It is with great pain that the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat confirms that two of its
members were brutally murdered in Multan yesterday. The deceased, Dr Shiraz
Ahmad Bajwa and Dr Noreen Bajwa were husband and wife and were both trained
as doctors. Both martyrs were under the age of forty.
Yesterday at around 3.30pm local time, unknown assailants attacked Dr Shiraz and
Dr Noreen at their home in Wapda Colony, Multan Road. The assailants first taped
together the hands, feet and mouths of both victims. They then tied rope around
their necks and strangled them to death. Following death Dr Shiraj was hung from a
nearby fan.

Dr Shiraz was an eye‐specialist who had served at various hospitals including the
Fazl‐e‐Umer Hospital in Rabwah. At the time of his death he was working at a
hospital in Wapda. Similarly Dr Noreen was working at a local children’s hospital.
The Press Spokesman of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat, Abid Khan said:
“What occurred in Multan yesterday was an act of such cruelty that it can never
be comprehended by decent and peace loving people. Dr Shiraz and Dr Noreen
had been married for just three years. They had both chosen career paths which
allowed them to serve their fellow men, women and children.
Pakistan is a country that is currently facing absolute ruin. Amongst this chaos the
hateful acts of religious extremists are ever increasing, to the extent that loving,
caring and innocent people are being murdered because they belong to a
community whose motto is ‘Love for All, Hatred for None.”
The International Community, Media and Human Rights organisations are all urged
to take action to protect the lives and rights of Ahmadi Muslims both in Pakistan
and in other countries where they face discrimination. In an era where freedom of
religion and belief is accepted as a basic human right throughout the world it is of
disbelief that Ahmadi Muslims are being murdered for no other reason than their
choice of religion.
End of Release
(Further info: Abid Khan, Press Secretary (44) 07795490682)
http://alislam.org/press-release/Multan%20Martyrs.March.09.pdf

Barack Obama And Ahmadiyya

2008-11-25T07:31:00.000-08:00

Ahmmadiyya USA with Barack Obama

Posted on 12 November 2008 by admin

Missionary in charge USA, Mr. Daud Hanif Sahib and Naib Amir Mr. Zinda M. Bajwa Sahib & Public Relations in charge, .Read Full Article for Picture.

http://www.rabwah.net/ahmmadiyya-usa-with-barack-obama/

New Mosque in Bradford

2008-11-25T07:23:00.000-08:00

Ahmadiyya “ Al Mahdi ” Mosque opened in Bradford

Posted on 12 November 2008 by admin

On 7th November 2008, the Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat, Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad inaugurated the ‘Al‐Mahdi Mosque’ in Bradford, UK, with his weekly Friday Sermon, broadcast live across the world from Bradford. Later, the same evening the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat UK hosted a special reception marking the inauguration of the mosque in which various dignitaries from the local community attended. During the reception Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad, spoke of how Ahmadiyya mosques were true Houses of God, from which only slogans of peace would ever emanate.

‘Our mosques promote equality’ – Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad

More than 2,000 people attended the official opening of the mosque in Bradford . The Al Mahdi Mosque, in Rees Way, Undercliffe, took two years to build.Coverage of the ceremony and the sermon was broadcast across 200 countries on Muslim Television Ahmadiyya

Ahmadiyya Bait‐ul‐Afiyyat Mosque Opens in Sheffield

2008-11-25T07:15:00.000-08:00

Ahmadiyya Bait‐ul‐Afiyyat Mosque Opens in Sheffield

Posted on 12 November 2008 by admin

The Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat, Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad, officially opened the ‘Bait‐ul‐Afiyyat’ Mosque in Sheffield on 8th November 2008. The name of the mosque means ‘House of Peace and Security’ which aptly represents the true teachings of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat. The event was marked with a celebratory reception hosted by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat UK, attended by dignitaries from various spheres of the local community. The keynote address was delivered by Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad, which he used to clarify the true teachings of Islam, which were based upon fulfilling the rights of God Almighty and serving humanity.

The gathering was then addressed by Councillor Jane Bird, the Lord Mayor of Sheffield who congratulated the Jamaat on its continued charitable work and said that she was proud to live in Sheffield which she said was a city where people lived side by side, respecting each other’s different cultures and beliefs. Next to the stage was Richard Caborn the Member of Parliament for Sheffield Central. He said that recently His Holiness had addressed many of his colleagues in Parliament at Westminster and that the words spoken by His Holiness had had a deeply profound effect on all those who participated. He further commented:

“It is a pleasure for me to be associated with a religion that has as its motto the words ‘Love
for All, Hatred for None’ and that is what we should all follow.”

Head Of Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat At Houses Of UK Parliament

2008-11-09T19:44:00.000-08:00

HEAD OF AHMADIYYA MUSLIM JAMAAT MAKES HISTORIC ADDRESS
AT HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT

Khilafat Centenary celebrations continue as UK Member of Parliament hosts
celebratory event at Westminster

In an historic event at the Houses of Parliament, the Head of the Ahmadiyya
Muslim Jamaat, Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad was yesterday invited to
address a number of senior members of Government, Parliamentarians and
Ambassadors as Justine Greening MP, hosted a reception in celebration of the
Khilafat Centenary, which is the system of spiritual leadership that unites
Ahmadi Muslims around the world.

The event was attended by over 30 MPs including Rt Hon Hazel Blears MP,
Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government; Dominic Grieve MP,
the Shadow Home Secretary; Simon Hughes MP, the President of the Liberal
Democrats; Gillian Merron MP, the Foreign Office Minister and Lord Eric
Avebury who gave the vote of thanks. The event was sponsored by Justine
Greening MP, in whose constituency the first Ahmadi Mosque built in the UK,
the ‘Fazl Mosque’, is based.
During her welcome address, Justine Greening MP, spoke of how the Fazl
Mosque had played a key and vital role in the local community ever since it
was built back in 1924. She said that it was indeed a privilege for her that the
Headquarters of the Jamaat was based in her constituency. Her comments
were echoed by Gillian Merron MP, the newly appointed Foreign Office
Minister. She said it was a great honour to meet with the Head of the Jamaat
and to be able to mark the Centenary of Khilafat. She said that the work of the
Jamaat was crucial because it ‘gave a voice to those who are marginalised’.
Commenting upon the continued persecution of Ahmadi Muslims in various
countries she singled out Pakistan and Indonesia as countries where the
situation appeared to be worsening. She said that the Foreign Office was
committed to effecting the safeguarding of Human Rights in all countries.
Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad, the Head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat,
used his address to speak about a number of contemporary issues that were
affecting the peace of society both in the UK and the world at large. He also
spoke about the role of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat which he said was as
the ‘standard bearer and true representative of Islam’. He said members of the
Jamaat who lived in the UK were all completely loyal to the country because
this was the teaching of the Founder of Islam, the Holy Prophet Muhammad
(peace be upon him).
His Holiness began his address by speaking of the great conflict that divided
the world today. Wars were being fought in different parts of the world. He
worried of even greater problems. He said:
“It is my fear that in view of the direction in which things are moving today,
the political and economic dynamics of the countries of the world may lead to
world war… Therefore, it is the duty of the superpowers to sit down and find
a solution to save humanity from the brink of disaster.”
He said that the only way to avert further hostilities and disputes was for all
Governments to act justly with their own people and in their dealings with
other countries. He congratulated the British Government for having shown
such qualities of fairness in its recent history. He cited its rule of pre‐partition
India as an example of its quality of fairness. Only if similar policies were
adopted throughout the world could catastrophe be averted.
Turning towards ‘terrorism’ he said that no form of terror or violence was
sanctioned in Islam and thus those who justified their heinous acts in its name
were causing for the world to be distrustful and even hateful of the religion of
Islam. As a consequence of this hate, certain non‐Muslim groups or individuals
had taken it upon themselves to attack Islam by defaming the character of the
Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the Holy Qur’an. Such acts
he stated could never be right and that a mutual respect for all religions and
beliefs was necessary for true peace to emerge.
His Holiness then discussed crime in society. He said Islam’s true teachings
were to try and reform those who had done wrong. Revenge and retribution
ought never to enter into the equation when debating the punishment of
criminals or prisoners of war. Crime also had to be fought at its root cause
which was the development of an unjust society. Thus countries had to be free
to develop and cultivate their own natural resources without the fear of other
more powerful nations exploiting them and this was just as true at an
individual level. This was the way forward. He said:
“Those countries that have been endowed with mineral resources should be
allowed to develop and trade at fair prices and under open skies and one
country should benefit from the resources of the other country. So, this would
be the right way, the way that is preferred by God Almighty.”
Finally, His Holiness spoke of the current economic crisis that engulfed the
entire world. He said the ‘credit crunch’ ought to be taken as a warning that
the western system of interest based capitalism was wholly incompatible with
a fair and just society. He said that though interest could appear to increase a
person’s capital, in the long term this was never true.
Following the keynote address of His Holiness various other MPs took to the
stage. Hazel Blears MP spoke of how she had greatly admired the keynote
address which she had found to be ‘pertinent, contemporary and challenging’.
She said that the speech that had just been delivered was the type of speech
that was rarely delivered by politicians because it was so cogent and clear to
the point. The Jamaat’s message of ‘Love for All, Hatred for None’ was as
important as it was simple because it was a message that led to unity rather
than division. She further mentioned how she brought with her the best
wishes of the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown who had personally sent her to
attend the event.
A regular at events hosted by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Jamaat, Dominic Grieve
MP, said he took great pleasure at finally being able to host the Jamaat. He
praised the Jamaat for its ‘wonderful contribution in all aspects of life’ which he
said was due to its policy of integration rather than exclusion. He too said that
he took great pride in the fact that the Headquarters of the Ahmadiyya Muslim
Jamaat were in London. Simon Hughes MP said that the plight of the Jamaat in
various countries illustrated the point that religious freedom had not yet been
achieved and that the Government had to work towards bringing about such
freedoms in all countries.
The event was concluded by a vote of thanks given by Lord Eric Avebury who
spoke of how the keynote address had ‘underlined the moral dimension that
we must all follow’. This His Holiness had done by speaking of both conflict
prevention and conflict solution. Lord Avebury then spoke of the continued
persecution of Ahmadis in Pakistan and said that organisations such as
Khatme‐Nabuwat perpetrated hatred against Ahmadis in such a way that
people here in the UK could never understand. He concluded by thanking His
Holiness for his ‘wise words of wisdom’.
Following the event Hadhrat Mirza Masroor Ahmad was given a guided tour of
the Houses of Parliament and held private audiences with Nick Clegg MP, the
Leader of the Liberal Democrats and Lord Bishop Nazir Ali.
End of Report

Islam, Democracy and Violence

2008-09-14T23:38:00.000-07:00

Islam, Democracy and Violence

By Asghar Ali Engineer

I was invited last week to Indonesia for a series of lectures by Asia Calling International Radio to speak on Islam, Democracy and Nation state. These days Indonesian intellectuals are rocked with questions we were faced with in early fifties in India. Also, all over Islamic world the question is being asked is Islam compatible with democracy and nation state? In Indonesia too, a largest Islamic country in the world the radical Islamists have raised this debate. The progressive Islamic thinkers there, are therefore, seized with these questions.

In a Asia Calling talk show where number of prominent public figures and diplomats were present these questions were raised by many. Also I spoke at Wahid Institute founded by former president of Indonesia and a leading scholar of Islam Abdur Rehman Wahid on experiences of Muslim minority in secular India. Indonesia, though a largest Muslim country in the world is still not an Islamic country but a Panchsila State. The doctrine of Panchsila was adopted during president Sukarno's time.

But now Indonesia is under pressure to become an Islamic state where Shari'ah law would be the official law and religious minorities like Christians and Buddhists and others would become second-class citizens. Still, it seems, Indonesian people are resisting this demand and are hence keen to know the experiences of secular countries like India. Also what is the experience of nation building in South Asia including Pakistan and Bangla Desh. I was also asked to speak on the concept of human rights in Islam as in a democratic country human rights have fundamental importance. Indonesia, a largest Islamic country, is also faced with this question as minorities are coming under attack and their human rights are being violated.

Of course it is not at all correct to say that Islam is incompatible to democracy, I said in my talk. This myth is being spread by the supporters of authoritarian regime in the Islamic world. Kings, Sheikhs and military dictators are spreading such ideas, doesn't matter if Islam gets bad name in the process. I firmly refuted this myth and maintained Islam does not come in the way of democracy; it is dictators and monarchs who come in its way.

We should remember, I said, that the Qur'an does not give any concept of state but a concept of society. Qur'an wants to establish a just society and what other way could be better suited to establish a just society than a democratic society. Also the Qur'an emphasizes equality of all human beings and equal dignity for all despite different languages, colours and race and nationality. How can it be achieved except through democratic society?

The authoritarian societies negate all these and hence not democracy but monarchy and dictatorship is un-Islamic, not democracy. During medieval ages, the concept like equal dignity, gender equality and human rights were just non-existent and hence monarchy was quite acceptable. It is no longer so. The modern society is emphatic about human equality without any distinction and human rights and gender equality are of great significance and hence democracy is the only way out for Qur'anic concept of just society to be realized Some people, especially radical Islamic groups do argue that the only just government could be through institution of khilafah. Let me say that the institution of khilafah has not been sanctioned by the Qur'an as pointed out above Qur'an does not recommend any form of government at all. The institution of khilafa was a result of historical situation. It was not even a part of Prophet's (PBUH) Sunna.

That is why there were differences among Muslims about the question of succession. Even most prominent companions of the Prophet (PBUH) were not sure about the mode of succession of the successor. Shia's maintain that the Prophet (PBUH) appointed his cousin and son-in-law Ali to succeed him. But only the supporters of Ahl-e-bait agreed with this view and others gathered in Saqifa Banu Sa'ida to discuss the question of his successor. There too there was no unanimity and after lot of suggestions and debates Umar proposed the name of Abu Bakr and did bay'ah on his hand and others followed.

Then there was no unanimity in electing the Caliph. Many said the Khalifah could be only from the tribe of Quraish of Mecca and Ansar of Madina who were from other tribes like Khazraj and Aus maintained that caliph should be from among them as they had helped the Prophet (PBUH) in Madina. It was also suggested that two persons be elected one from Quraish and one from Ansars. But this viewpoint was also rejected and ultimately Abu Bakr of Quraish was elected.

Then it was said that there could be only one caliph at one time but this concept also proved to be fragile as when the Abbasid defeated Umayyads, one of Umayyad's family fled to Spain and founded another empire there and at a time there came into existence two caliphs and when Buwahids captured power and caliph became merely a nominal head, caliphate turned into sultanate. The institution of Caliphate also lasted only for thirty years and Mu'awiyah captured power without any sanction from Muslims as in the case of first caliph and what is more he nominated his own son Yazid against the wishes of all Muslims and against the wishes of prominent companions of the Prophet many of whom were then alive.

All this clearly shows that the institution of khilafah was a tentative historical construct, not the result of any divine injunction either based on Qur'an or Sunnah. Thus it cannot be argued that the institution of khilafah be restored and that is the only way out. Also, institution of khilafah, whatever way it came into existence was after all more democratic than monarchy or sheikhdoms and dictatorship which have no sanction of any kind at all.

Also, in case of electing a caliph tribal experience of the time was used as successor to a tribal chief was elected by the members of the tribe. There was no concept of one-man one vote at the time. In the institution of modern democracy one man one vote is the tried and tested method for electing public representative. New historical experience has resulted in new methods of election. There should be no hesitation in excepting and assimilating new experiences. During the period of Khilafat many institutions were readily borrowed from Roman and Sassanid empire like keeping salary register for soldiers from Iran. Earlier only share in the loot was given to those taking part in the fight.

Another question which is raised by Islamists is imposition of Shari'ah law. They argue that in democracy there are man made (human made) laws and Shari'ah law is divine law and this cannot be allowed in an Islamic state as only Shari'ah law should be enforced. This is also an erroneous concept. Shari'ah laws can be divided into two categories: 'ibadat and mu'amalat (i.e. laws pertaining to salah, saum, haj etc. which are part of 'ibadat.

Then the laws pertaining to mu'amalat which include relations between human beings and human beings. Laws about mu'amalat cannot be permanent. Of course no changes can be made as far as Shari'ah laws concerning 'ibadat are concerned but as for mu'amalat laws cannot be permanent and parliament should be empowered to make laws in those respects. All modern democracies allow people to pursue their respective religions and do not interfere in their religious affairs. In all secular democracies also right to religion is a fundamental right.

Also, as far as 'ibadat are concerned it does not require enforcement by any state but its importance lies in its voluntary nature. 'Ibadat pertain to ones heart and soul and real 'ibadat is one which is done most sincerely and from ones core of heart. It cannot be enforced. And it will cease to be 'ibadat if it is enforced by a state machinery. This is what Qur'an also maintains when it says there is no compulsion in matters of religion.

Thus no Islamic state is required even to enforce provisions of Shari'ah. An Islamic state again would mean the majority of Muslim sect who live in that country would enjoy real freedom and those Muslims who belong to other sects would be persecuted. We see this right in the beginning of Islamic history. The Abbasids initially subscribed to the doctrine of createdness of Qur'an and all those who rejected this doctrine were severely persecuted. Even eminent Imam like Abu Hanifa was flogged for rejecting this doctrine.

In modern Islamic states too we see this phenomenon. In Saudi Arabia only Wahabi Muslims enjoy real freedom of religion Those who do not subscribe to this doctrine are persecuted or do not enjoy freedom like Wahabis to practice their religion. Similarly the Shias are persecuted in Sunni majority states and Sunnis in Shiah majority states. In Iraq a Sunni minority dominated and persecuted Shi'ahs and in Syria, Alawi minority dominate over Sunni majority as it wields political power.

Real freedom of religion is possible only in democratic state where all enjoy equal rights irrespective of caste, creed and colour. Large number of Muslims today live as minority in various secular democratic states in various Asian, African and Western countries and enjoy right to freely practice their religion. This it is not correct to maintain that you need an Islamic state to practice Islam freely.
Every democratic state permits Shari'ah laws pertaining to personal laws like marriage, divorce, property, inheritance etc. In secular India too Muslims are completely free to practice these laws. Indian Muslim refuse any reform in their laws and state does not insist on that though in many Muslim countries these laws have been reformed.

Now the question about criminal laws whether it would be permitted in a secular democratic state to be permitted. The answer is certainly no. In India the Britishers had abolished Islamic criminal laws in 19th century itself and enforced a criminal code drafted by their parliament. The Muslim Ulama agreed to abolition of the Islamic code and agreed to enforcement of common criminal code. Today in the modern world many Muslim majority countries have also taken similar steps. Criminal punishments are largely contextual. In the tribal Arab society certain punishments were thought to be more effective and hence they were recommended. The main purpose is to prevent crime and nature and extent of punishment can certainly change. Also, there is provision for tazir punishment also in Islam and the rulers did enforce tazir punishments too. So it is not matter of principle whether hudud laws are enforced or not. Main thing is to check crimes.

Thus it would be seen that a secular and democratic state is equally good as long as it permits Muslims to practice their religion. It is also important to note that the Indian Ulama voluntarily opted for a secular state as opposed to an Islamic state in the form of Pakistan in 1947 when India was divided. They vigorously opposed creation of separate Muslim country and preferred to have a secular democratic and multi-religious, multi-cultural country. And who knew Islam better than the Ulama of Darul Ulum Deoband.

An Islamic state itself, as pointed out before, is a historical construct and not a Qur'anic concept and hence it is in no way obligatory for Muslims to set up an Islamic state. Those who argue in favour of Islamic state cannot produce any argument from the Qur'an and Sunna. In every country there are certain forces who adopt majoritarian aggressive postures and want their religion to be associated with the affairs of the state. In India, for example, a section of Hindus want India to become Hindu Rashtra (i.e. Hindu nation) but secular Hindus resist that demand.

In any religious state all citizens of different religious persuasions cannot enjoy equal rights and no modern state can allow this. The very essence of modern polity is that all citizens irrespective of their religion should enjoy equal rights. Maulana Maududi of Jamat-e-Islami of Pakistan had argued that no non-Muslim can become head of the state or prime minister of Pakistan. He or she cannot even hold any key post in the government. Sure in secular states also no person from minority religion will find it easy to become head of the state but theoretically it is not ruled out. In India a Sikh, a non-Hindu became a prime minister and three Muslims could become president of the country.

Another objection raised by many Islamists is that in secular democratic states human rights are sacred and the very concept of human rights is un-Islamic. This is also not in keeping with the Qur'anic teachings. Firstly, most of the Islamic countries with few exceptions have signed the UNO's Human Rights Declaration. Some countries who did not sign the declaration their objection was that one who renounces Islam cannot be put to death as freedom of religion is a fundamental principle of human rights.

However, as pointed out above Qur'an itself upholds right to freedom of religion and the Qur'an pronounced it much before modern world realized its significance. It is very strange that now some Muslims in contradistinction to Qur'anic principle, of which they should have been justly proud, reject the doctrine of freedom of religion as modern western and hence unacceptable. The Shari'ah rule that one who renounces Islam should be given death sentence is highly controversial and there is no unanimity on this among Muslim jurists. Maulana Aslam Jairajpuri, for example, disagrees with it and advances several arguments from Qur'an and Sunna to show death punishment for renouncing Islam is not justified.

In fact freedom and faith go together. One cannot genuinely believe in any religion unless one is completely free to accept or reject it. If one is forced to accept a religion it cannot be accepted by his heart and soul. He may accept it outwardly but his heart and soul may resent it. It is precisely for this psychological reason that Qur'an made principle of freedom of religion so important. The Shari'ah provision for death sentence was more for sedition than for renouncing religion. It was feared that a Muslim living in an Islamic state, if renounces Islam, he may join hands with the enemy and conspire against Islamic state. Punishment for sedition world over is death.

The fear of sedition was genuine because Muslim states were surrounded by Christian states and there was direct political, though not religious confrontation between the two and hence anyone renouncing Islam there was genuine fear that he may help the Christian state. The crusades are well known from 11th to 13th century. That period of confrontation between Muslims and Christians was most intense. Thus death punishment for renouncing Islam makes sense during that period. This context must be kept in mind but in the long run the Qur'anic doctrine of freedom of religion must be upheld.

As for other principles of human rights even the most orthodox Muslim cannot object to them. For example, equality of all human beings is very central to Qur'anic teachings too. Human dignity is sacred in Islam as well. Gender equality is also clearly enunciated in the Qur'an. Moreover, woman has been given equal rights for contracting marriage and husband and wife have been described as each others garment. All these are enshrined in declaration of human rights issued by the UNO. Those Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia who did not sign Human Rights' Declaration also did not object to these provisions.

Those who argue that implementation of Shari'ah is an obligation of Islamic State should understand that Shari'ah evolved gradually and there were great deal of differences among the Muslim jurists on many issues. Thus Shari'ah, as one Islamic scholar Prof. Muhammad Mujeeb maintained, is a human approach to divine injunctions. That is very apt description of Shari'ah laws as evolved by many eminent jurists during first four centuries of Islam.

The great Urdu poet Iqbal from Indian sub-continent also maintained that every generation of Muslims should be entitled to rethink Shari'ah issues and in a Muslim majority country parliament will be the right forum to do so. He also maintained that ijtihad is the dynamic principle in Islam and ijtihad becomes necessary in changed conditions in modern society. Thus a democratic society with an elected parliament would be a better institutional arrangement for making Shari'ah more relevant to our contemporary world. Many new issues have arisen which need use of ijtihad quite urgent.

And where Muslims are a minority and live in secular democratic state should evolve their own forums to bring about necessary changes. Today more Muslims live in minority situation than in majority and hence they would have to evolve their own institutions to do ijtihad with the cooperation of Ulama and modern scholars. No secular democratic state can stop them from attempting these creative changes in their laws. All this has to be done within the framework of Islam. No changes can be brought outside this framework if they are to be accepted by Muslims at large.

To accept democratic state would be far more beneficial to Muslims and would enable Muslims to practice their religion faithfully and fearlessly than in so called Islamic state where sectarianism and fundamentalism will prevail. A democratic state is much better guarantee of genuine freedom of religion than a state based on any religion. This seems to be contradictory but in fact true.

Thus we must properly educate Muslim masses and prepare them for acceptance of democracy in Islamic world. They should be made aware that those who oppose democracy in the name of Islam are really serving certain vested interests rather than Islam. Islamic world is still reeling under the impact of feudal and medieval forces who serve their own interests in the name of Islam. Islam is quite compatible with democracy. It is rather interests of rulers of Muslim countries which are not compatible with democracy.

Indonesia, I said in my lectures, has achieved democracy after a long spell under dictatorship and it must be protected at any cost and all religious minorities also should be guaranteed full freedom to follow their respective religion. Tolerance of differences is an important principle of democracy and due tolerance should be shown to all different religious opinions too. It will not violate any Islamic principle at all.

See: India Muslim
http://www.wahidinstitute.org/english/content/view/231/52/

Model of Muslim tolerance

2008-09-14T21:08:00.000-07:00

The Last King of Java
Indonesia 's former president offers a model of Muslim tolerance

BY BRET STEPHENS
JAKARTA, Indonesia--Suppose for a moment that the single most influential religious leader in the Muslim world openly says "I am for Israel." Suppose he believes not only in democracy but in the liberalism of America's founding fathers. Suppose that, unlike so many self-described moderate Muslims who say one thing in English and another in their native language, his message never alters. Suppose this, and you might feel as if you've descended into Neocon Neverland.

In fact, you have arrived in Jakarta and are sitting in the small office of an almost totally blind man of 66 named Abdurrahman Wahid. A former president of Indonesia, he is the spiritual leader of the Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), an Islamic organization of some 40 million members. Indonesians know him universally as Gus Dur, a title of affection and respect for this descendant of Javanese kings. In the U.S. and Europe he is barely spoken of at all--which is both odd and unfortunate, seeing as he is easily the most important ally the West has in the ideological struggle against Islamic radicalism.

Conversation begins with some old memories. In the early 1960s, Mr. Wahid, whose paternal grandfather founded the NU in 1926 and whose father was Indonesia's first minister of religious affairs, won a scholarship to Al-Azhar University in Cairo, which for 1,000 years had been Sunni Islam's premier institution of higher learning. Mr. Wahid hated it.

"These old sheikhs only let me study Islam's traditional surras in the old way, which was rote memorization," he recalls, speaking in the excellent English he learned as a young man listening to the BBC and Voice of America. "Before long I was fed up. So I spent my time reading books from the USIS [United States Information Service], the Egyptian National Library, and at the cinema. I used to watch three, four movies a day."

As Mr. Wahid saw it, the basic problem with Al-Azhar was that the state interfered in its affairs and demanded intellectual conformity--a lesson he carries with him to the present day. In 1966 he left Cairo for Baghdad University, where he encountered much the same thing: "The teaching [suffered from] conventionalism. You were not allowed to go your own way."

Here Mr. Wahid digresses into Islamic history. "In the second century of Islam, the Imam al-Shafi'i began remodeling the religion," he says. "He put into place the mechanism of understanding everything through law [Shariah]. Now people can't talk about that anymore. We cannot attack al-Shafi'i."

The point is crucial to Mr. Wahid's understanding of Islam as being something broader, deeper and better than the tradition-bound view of life imposed by traditional schools of Islamic law (all the more striking because Mr. Wahid is himself a leading theologian of the Shafi'i school). It is equally crucial to Mr. Wahid's politics, not to mention his relaxed approach to social issues.

"The globalization of ethics is always frightening to people, particularly Islamic radicals," he says in reference to a question about the so-called pornoaksi legislation. For the past three years Indonesian politics have been roiled by an Islamist attempt to label anything they deem sexually arousing to be a form of "porno-action." Mr. Wahid sees this as an assault on pancasila, Indonesia's secularist state philosophy from the time of its founding. He also sees it as an assault on common sense. "Young people like to kiss each other," he says, throwing his hands in the air. "Why not? Just because old people don't do it doesn't mean it's wrong."

Mr. Wahid is equally relaxed about some of the controversies that have recently erupted between Muslims and the West. Pope Benedict's Regensburg speech from last September was "a good speech, though as usual he pointed to the wrong times and the wrong cases." As for the furor over the Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad, he asks "why should we be angry?" And he dismisses Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, the al-Jazeera preacher who helped incite the cartoon riots, as an "angry, conventional" thinker.

What really concerns Mr. Wahid is what he sees as the increasingly degraded state of the Muslim mind. That problem is becoming especially acute at Indonesian universities and in the pesantren--the religious boarding schools that graduate hundreds of thousands of students every year. "We are experiencing the shallowing of religion," he says, bemoaning the fact that the boarding schools persist in teaching "conventional"--that word again--Islam.

But Mr. Wahid's critique is not just of formal Islamic education. He also attacks the West's philosophy of positivism, which, he says, "relies too much on the idea of conquering knowledge and mastering scientific principles alone." This purely empirical and essentially soulless view of things, broadly adopted by Indonesia's secular state universities, gives its students a bleak choice: "Either they follow the process or they are outside the process."

As a result, Western-style education in Indonesia has come to represent not just secularism but the negation of religion, to which too many students have responded by embracing fundamentalism. At the University of Indonesia, for example, an estimated three in four students are members or sympathizers of the "Prosperous Justice Party," or PKS, an ultra-radical Islamic party.

This raises the subject of religion and politics. "For us, an Islamic party is not a thing to follow," he says, adding that "religion and morality is tied to person, not a party." To illustrate the point, he observes that religious parties in the Muslim world have more often been the handmaids of dictatorship than democracy. "Whenever governments tried to enforce their institutions they use 'Islamic' people as potential allies." The Front for the Defense of Islam (FPI), a radical vigilante group that uses violent means to suppress "un-Islamic" behavior, was, he observes, originally a creature of the Indonesian military.

So why did Mr. Wahid, as a religious leader, make the choice to go into politics himself? He demurs at the suggestion of choice. "I am against politics, so to speak. In 1984 I tried hard to convince people that the NU should not be in politics." He was overruled by others in the organization, and eventually he founded the Party of National Awakening, or PKB. Yet the party, he insists, is "based on non-Islamic principles," a fact he illustrates by pointing to a nearby aide who is an Indonesian Protestant. "We have to go for plurality, for tolerance."

He also believes that the "only solution" to the challenge of Islamic radicalization in Indonesia is more democracy. But what about the example of Hamas, which came to power through democratic means, and of other groups like Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood that would probably do the same if given the chance? Mr. Wahid's answer is to distinguish between what he calls "full democratization" and the "hollow imitation of democracy" that he sees taking place in Indonesia as well as among Arabs in Palestine and Iraq.

"The problem is not personalities, it is institutions," he says. "For the past 250 years the Americans have had not just Jefferson's concept of the rights of the individual but also Alexander Hamilton's belief in a strong state." In order to function properly, democracy requires competent government that can effectively uphold the rule of law. It also requires a broadly understood concept of self-rule, which is missing in too much of the developing world: "Here, ordinary citizens expect the government to do everything for them."

He therefore takes a fairly dim view of Iraq's democratic prospects. "Iraqis understood that Saddam had caused them trouble," and were grateful to be rid of him, he says. "But as for the U.S. concept of democracy, they don't understand it at all." The problem, he adds, goes double in the rest of the Arab world, where, he says, the prevailing view is that being a democracy is an expression of weakness, while being a dictatorship is a sign of strength.

What's needed, in other words, is for countries like Indonesia and Iraq to find a way to combine effective government with a powerful respect for the rights of the citizen. But how one goes about doing that is itself a deeper problem, a problem of culture. "How do we follow the West without [becoming] Westerners? How do you do that? I don't know."

In fact, Mr. Wahid has begun to develop an answer through two organizations he chairs, the Wahid Institute, run by his daughter Yenny, and LibForAll, an Indonesia- and U.S.-based nonprofit run by American C. Holland Taylor, which works to discredit Islamism's ideology of hatred. "It's up to LibForAll to introduce both sides to Muslims; to show that common principles are also the principles of Islam," Mr. Wahid says. "Hundreds of thousands of Muslim youth learn in countries where there is technological modernity. We need to [nurture] the emergence of a new kind of people who think in terms of being modern but still relate to the past."

In fact, that perfectly describes Mr. Wahid, who is keenly aware of his own roots in both Islamic and Javanese traditions. Among his ancestors are the last Hindu-Buddhist king of the Javanese Majapahit dynasty, and Sunan Kalijogo, a Sufi mystic who married Islamic and local traditions and, according to lore, defeated Islamic extremism in the 16th century. Can Mr. Wahid, heir to this venerable tradition, accomplish the same feat? "Right now, the fundamentalists think they're winning," he once told a friend. "But they're going to wake up one day and realize we beat them."

Mr. Stephens writes "Global View," The Wall Street Journal's foreign affairs column

(The Wall Street Journal April 7, 2007)

http://www.gusdur.net/english/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=758&Itemid=1

Two Persons of Ahmadi Sect Murdered

2008-09-11T09:20:00.000-07:00

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-203- 2008

10 September 2008
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---
PAKISTAN: Two persons murdered after an anchor person proposed the widespread lynching of Ahmadi sect followers

ISSUES: Murder; religious discrimination; freedom of religion; media
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that an anchor person working for a prominent television channel has incited Muslims in Pakistan to kill - to devastating effect. The targets are followers of the Muslim Ahmadi sect, a group which has been declared non-Islamic under the constitution of Pakistan. The first killing happened within 24 hours of the broadcast, and just under two days later a district chief of the Ahmadi was murdered. Followers of the religion are understandably frightened, and many have left their homes and are taking shelter at their central mosque, the Rabwa.

CASE DETAILS:

In a program aired on 7 September 2008 the anchor of the religious program 'Alam Online', Dr. Amir Liaquat Hussain--also former federal minister for religious affairs--declared the murder of Ahmadi sect members to be necessary (Wajib ul Qatal) according to Islamic teachings, because its followers don't believe in the last prophet, Mohammad, peace be upon him. Dr. Amir repeated his instruction several times, urging fundamentalists Muslims to kill without fear.

While on air the anchor person also pressured the other two Islamic scholars (from two different sects) on the program to support the statement. This resulted in a unanimous decision among the scholars, on air during a popular television show, to urge lynching with the intent to kill. This was not a one-off. On September 9, Mr. Hussain answered a query with the comment that blasphemers are liable to be put to death.

According to the information received, at 1:15pm on September 8, 18 hours after the broadcast, six persons entered the Fazle Umer Clinic, a two-story hospital at Mirpur Khas city and two of them went to the second floor and started pressuring 45 year-old Dr. Abdul Manan Siddiqui to come downstairs to attend to a patient in crisis. Dr. Manan left his office and descended into an ambush. He was shot 11 times and died on the spot. His private guard was also shot and is in a serious condition. A woman was also injured by firing. The killers remained at the hospital until the doctor was declared dead, then they walked out of the building's front entrance. Police registered the killers as unknown.

On September 9, 48 hours after the broadcast, Mr. Yousaf, a 75 year-old rice trader and district chief of the Ahmadi sect was killed on his way to prayer in Nawab Shah, Sindh province. Yousaf was fired on from people on motor bikes, and sustained three bullet wounds. He died on the way to the hospital. The assailants had taken a route past a police station. No one was arrested.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

The Ahmadi sect was declared non-Islamic sect on September 7, 1974, through a constitutional amendment, and was labeled a minority sect. Since then, there has been open hatred of the sect by certain Islamic circles and fundamentalists across the Muslim world, and sect members suffer widespread discrimination. Ahmadi followers are not allowed to bury their dead in the ordinary grave yards of Muslims, and many of those buried before 1974 were shifted by fundamentalists.

Since 1984 (when statistics have been compiled) around 93 Ahmadis have been killed for their allegiance to their sect, with four killed so far this year, including Dr. Ghulam Sarwar on March 19 in Faisalabad, Punjab province and Mr. Basharat Mughal on February 24 in Karachi. The Dr. Siddiqui is the 15th medical doctor killed since 1984.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to following authorities and urge them to appropriate actions in order to stop the killings of Ahmadi followers and recognized religious freedom. Please also demand them to prevent any religious hatred or discrimination from broadcasting through the media.

Please be informed that the AHRC has also written separate letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief.

Indonesia-The Most Populous Muslim Nation

2008-07-22T23:13:00.001-07:00

June 13, 2008
Exclusive: Indonesia - A Civil War Between Islamists and Moderates?: Part Two of Two

By :Adrian Morgan

In Part One I described how the Front Pembela Islam (Islamic Defenders' Front or FPI) had threatened to make war on the minority Islamic sect called the Ahmadiyah.

On June 1st, FPI members violently attacked a procession of the National Alliance for Freedom of Religion and Faith (AKKBB), who support the rights of the Ahmadiyah. Several FPI members, including leader Habib Rizieq Shahib were arrested on Wednesday June 3rd in a police operation that involved 1,500 officers. Most FPI members were released shortly afterwards but Habib Rizieq Shahib and seven others remain in police custody.

The Ahmadiyah (also called Ahmadi or Ahmadiyya) revere their founder Mirza Ghulam Ahmad - with many regarding him as a prophet. This places them into the category of Muslim "heretics," as traditionally Mohammed is the last prophet of Islam. The Indonesian Ahmadiyah have recently officially claimed that they regard their founder not as a prophet but as a pious Muslim. Their protestations have been ignored by the Indonesian government.

The FPI's threats against the Ahmadiyah worsened this year after the nation's leading group of clerics, the Majelis Ulama Indonesia (Indonesia Ulemas Council or MUI) declared that the Ahmadis were "deviant." On July 27, 2005, the same council had denounced all liberal and pluralist interpretations of Islam and condemned the Ahmadiyah, a fatwa that led to violence. The Ahmadiyah in Sukadana in West Java were attacked.

Government bodies suggested that they would ban the Ahmadiyah movement, even though such an action contravened the 1945 constitution. This constitution is based upon a set of principles known as Pancasila.

On Monday June 9th this week, about 5,000 Muslim protesters demonstrated in front of the presidential palace in Jakarta. They called for the Ahmadiyah to be disbanded. They also called for the seven members of the FPI in police custody, including leader and founder Habib Rizieq Shahib, to be released.

The group that protested on Monday is called the Peaceful Alliance against Islam's Defilement (ADA API). The group is comprised of various Islamist factions, including Hizb ut-Tahrir and the notoriously violent Forum Betawi Rempug (Betawi Brotherhood Forum or FBR). Noer Muhammad Iskandar, who led the demonstration on Monday, told the crowd: "Muslims' demand for disbandment of the deviant Ahmadiyah sect is not a violation of religion freedom because Ahmadiyah has defiled Islamic teachings by recognizing Mirza Ghulan Ahmad as the last prophet, instead of the Prophet Muhammad."

Alliances between extremists have been a key feature of recent attempts to push Indonesian society towards Islamic "orthodoxy."

The Government Restricts Ahmadiyah

On the evening of Monday June 9th this year, the Religious Affairs Minister, Maftuh Basyuni, issued a decree. Basyuni was educated in Saudi Arabia (where the Ahmadiyah are banned from visiting Mecca) and has previously urged the Ahmadiyah to abandon their claims to be Muslim.

On Monday Basyuni's decree, backed by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's cabinet, told the Ahmadiyah that they must stop spreading their religion or face five year jail terms on charges of blasphemy. The decree was co-signed by Hendarman Supanji, the Attorney General.

The MUI (Indonesia Ulemas Council) has vowed to uphold the government's decree against the Ahmadiyah sect by spying on the group and reporting its activities. It issued a statement which read: "If Ahmadiyah disobeys the decree, or continues its deviant activities, we will report it to the authorities and recommend that the president disband Ahmadiyah."

The MUI has deliberately attempted to undermine religious tolerance in Indonesia. In May 2005 the MUI encouraged the arrest of three Christian women under the Child Protection Act for inviting Muslim children to a "Happy Sunday" event run by their church. The women were jailed for three years on September 1, 2005.

The MUI first issued a fatwa against the Ahmadiyah in 1981, with another in 2001. In 2001 the secretary general of the MUI was Din Syamsuddin. Since 2005, Syamsuddin has been president of the "moderate" Muhammadiya movement, which has 30 million members. Currently he has attempted to be publicly diplomatic about the Ahmadiyah. In April this year, Syamsuddin had said that the Ahmadiyah should be persuaded to return to conventional Islam. Syamsuddin is a potential candidate for next year's presidential elections.

The July 2005 fatwa from the MUI that condemned deviant, pluralist and liberal forms of Islam affected not only the Ahmadiyah. Christian communities - particularly in West Java - became targets of a group calling itself the Anti-Apostasy Alliance (AGAP). This Alliance includes the Front Pembela Islam, and exploited a 1979 ruling by former president Suharto to declare churches to be illegal. The SKB or Joint Ministerial Decree declared that religious buildings should have proper permits, and was originally introduced to prevent Islamists building mosques.

The SKB stated that before a religious building should be constructed, the community's neighbors should be consulted. The MUI, which annually receives $600,000 from the Indonesian government, would pressure local people to disapprove of such buildings. In the month after the July 2005 fatwa by the MUI, at least 35 churches in West Java were closed down.

In March 2006 the SKB was revised. The law made it more difficult for minority groups such as Christians and Ahmadiyah to construct places of worship. The law stated that a place of worship must have a minimum of 90 members and receive approval from 60 neighbors of another faith.

On Wednesday last week, when 59 members of the FPI were arrested, some individuals avoided capture. The leader of the FPI wing that led the attack on June 1st remained at large. This man, called Munarman, this week surrendered himself to police late on Monday night. He claimed that his mission to outlaw the "infidel" Ahmadiyah sect had achieved its goal.

The Ahmadiyah have been in Indonesia since the 1920s. To become an Ahmadi, a vow is taken to "harm no one." What seems bizarre to Western minds is that a group which is peaceful and has not initiated violence is outlawed, while a group (FPI) that is openly violent, and has publicly called for a war to be made on the Ahmadiyah remains "legal."

Inciting Murder

On February 14th this year, Front Pembela Islam cleric Ahmad Sobri Lubis addressed a large crowd at a rally in Banjar, West Java. A video of his performance (in Bahasa Indonesian) can be found on the internet. The language used by Sobri Lubis is uncompromising.

"Kill! Kill! Kill!," Sobri Lubis told the rally. "It is halal to spill the blood of Ahmadiyah. If any of you should kill Ahmadiyah as ordered by us, I personally, as well as the FPI, will take responsibility."

Lubis is the secretary general of the Font Pembela Islam. He urged followers to kill Ahmadiyah members because they defile Islam. He said of human rights that they were cat excrement.

Also attending the rally was Muhammad Al Khathath, head of the Forum Umat Islam (FUI). Abu Bakar Bashir also spoke at the rally. Bashir was jailed for giving consent to the 2002 Bali bombing, in which 202 people died. Bashir was released on June 13, 2006 and following an appeal, his conviction was overturned by Indonesia's Supreme Court on December 21, 2006. Bashir formerly ran the Indonesian Mujahideen Council (Majelis Mujahidin Indonesia or MMI).

Calls for the deaths of those they oppose have been a hallmark of FPI activities for most of the time that the group has been in existence. In October 2000, two years after being founded, armed members of the FPI patrolled Sukarno-Hatta International Airport. Their spokesman, Zainuddin, said: "'If we find any Israelis, we will first try to persuade them to leave, but if they refuse, we will slaughter them."

Two months later, on December 13, 2000 FPI violence led to the death of a civilian. The group was intimidating residents of an alleged red light district in Cikijing, Subang regency, in West Java and raiding entertainment centers. The vigilantes found women whom they claimed were prostitutes. They cut the women's hair short and then began attacking homes in the neighborhood. When one young man objected, he was stabbed to death.

The day after the stabbing, locals burned the house of Saleh Al Habsy, local FPI leader. On that Friday (December 15, 2000), the FPI under the leadership of Alawy Usman attacked a police station in Cikoko, 55 miles east of Jakarta, the capital. Three police officers were seriously injured. Usman later claimed that a rock had been thrown from the police station as his vigilantes passed. The rock caused one member to fall. Assuming he had been shot, the mob attacked the police station. No one was charged for the fatal stabbing in Cikijing.

The FPI's threats to kill Christians have continued even after the violence that took place on Pancasila Day (June 1st) this year. On June 4th in Tangerang in West Java, church leader Bedali Hulu was threatened with death by FPI members. The threats happened as he visited his elderly mother-in-law.

The FPI has been able to act with virtual impunity. Its attacks on business premises rarely brought arrests, and when arrests have happened prosecutions rarely follow. Islamic vigilante groups in Indonesia are connected with political figures or parties. In 1998, the FPI was linked with a voluntary militia called PAM Swakarsa. This militia was funded by B. J. Habibie, the President of Indonesia who succeeded Suharto. PAM Swakarsa and the FPI were used by the government and military to harass and intimidate student opponents of the government and the military figures supporting Habibie. PAM Swakarsa was founded in 1998 by Abdul Gafar, who was then deputy-speaker in the government. Gafur still plays a role in politics, albeit a corrupt one. FPI is still said to be linked to the military.

FPI has close links with other fanatical and quasi-paramilitary factions in Indonesia, such as the MMI which was founded by Abu Bakar Bashir. It is linked to the Forum Umat Islam, which was founded in 1999 when it was linked to President Habibie and was used to fight against students loyal to Megawati (Sukarno's daughter).

Playboy

In 2006, FPI took on a battle that had been initiated by the MMI (Majelis Mujahideen Indonesia) - the attack upon Indonesian Playboy. In January Avianto Nugroho announced that he had gained the rights to publish an Indonesian version of the famous magazine, though he made clear that it would contain no nudes. The MMI chairman, Irfan Awas, declared that Playboy was pornographic and its publication in Indonesia would damage the nation's morals, even without nudity.

The first issue was intended to appear in March, but was delayed. The first Indonesian edition of Playboy, edited by Erwin Arnada, appeared on April 7, 2006. FPI members protested outside the magazine's editorial offices in Jakarta.

Alawi Usman, who had led the 2000 attack upon Cikoko police station said: "If within a week they are still active and sell the magazine, we will take physical action." Tubagus Muhamad Sidik, another FPI activist, said: "Even if it had no pictures of women in it, we would still protest it because of the name... Our crew will clearly hound the editors."

Indonesian radio stations buzzed with callers, with many of these complaining about Playboy's lack of raunchiness. One caller quipped: "It's sinful to read Playboy if there's no nudity!" Less than a week after initial publication, FPI members violently attacked the offices of the magazine.

On Sunday February 19, 2006, about 400 FPI members had tried to storm the American Embassy over the Danish cartoons. Stones had been thrown at the embassy. On April 12, 2006, about 300 FPI members stoned the building in South Jakarta where Playboy was put together. Attempts were made to smash though the iron gates outside the building, and policemen were attacked.

The violence led to Velvet Media Group, who published Playboy, being forced to vacate their offices. They eventually moved to Bali.

The editor of Indonesian Playboy, Erwin Arnada, was taken to court, charged with indecency. When one of the clothed models from the first edition, Andhara Early, appeared in the South Jakarta courthouse in January 2006, protesters insulted her. Andhara too was charged with indecency. As she left the building she was called a prostitute who would go to Hell. Others shouted: "I hope your daughter gets raped." Andahara Early and another model, Kartika Oktavini Gunawan, were acquitted. On Thursday April 5, 2007, Erwin Arnada was also acquitted.

Changing Society

The Front Pembela Islam is well-known for its campaigns of violence and intimidation. In February 2006, while the Danish cartoon crisis was going on, members of the FPI and the Anti-Apostasy Movement were intimidating foreigners in Bandung, West Java. 27 activists were arrested outside the Holiday Inn in Bandung. The activists wee asking foreigners what they thought of the cartoons. "If they support the cartoons, we will have no other choice but to ask them to leave Indonesia," one activist said.

The Front Pembela Islam also influences politics in Indonesia at a local and national level. At the start of 2006, numerous local administrations introduced Islamic bylaws. In Tangerang near Jakarta, a law was introduced that stated that any woman found alone outside after 7 pm was a prostitute.

A Muslim woman, Lilis Lindawati was one of the first to become a victim of this law. In late February 2006 as she waited for a bus to take her home, the pregnant wife and mother of two children was arrested. She had just finished work as a waitress, around 8 pm. She was placed in a cell and taken to court on the following day. In court she was made to empty the contents of her purse. Lipstick fell out. Judge Barmen Sinurat told her: "There is powder and lipstick in your bag. That means you're lying to say that you are a housewife. You are guilty. You are prostitute."

The judge fined Mrs. Lindawatis $45 but as she had only her bus fare home, she was forced to spend three days in jail. Mayor Wahidin who introduced the law is the brother of Hassan Wiraduya, the Indonesian foreign minister. He said of Mrs. Lindawati's case: "She could not prove she is not a prostitute. It is true when my men arrested her she was not committing adultery, but why does she put on such make-up?" Mrs. Lindawati later sued the mayor of Tangerang, but whether she won is unknown.

In Depok, south of Jakarta, similar laws were being introduced. These had been brought in after the local administration had consulted with the FPI and the Indonesian Ulemas Council (MUI). Indonesian researcher Syaiful Mujani has claimed that such bylaws are unconstitutional and illegal.

In South Sulawesi, laws were introduced female civil servants are forced to wear Islamic clothing and government employees must be able to read and write Arabic.

On Saturday April 22, 2006 a meeting of the Indonesian Youth Circle claimed that Islamists and Muslim hardliners were threatening Indonesia's democracy. Zuly Qodir of Muhammadiyah said: "Now the sectarian groups are pressing their agenda to change Indonesia into a theocratic state. They seek to formalize Islam as the state ideology."

At that time, a controversial act was being introduced in the nation's parliament, called the Anti-Pornography Bill which would have made aspects of the Islamist bylaws become standardized throughout the nation. This proposed law was opposed by former president Kyai Haji Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur). As a result, on May 23, 2006, FPI members forced him off a stage at a rally in Purwakarta, West Java.

The bill would have outlawed kissing in public - resulting in a five year jail sentence for those found guilty. Exposing certain areas of the body, such the stomach, thigh or hip, could have invoked a 10 year jail sentence and $50,000 fine. On the island of Lombok, Muslim women protested against the bill. Yenny Wahid, a Muslim women's rights campaigner said of the bill: "This is an attempt by some people to import Arab culture to Indonesia."

When women condemned the draft Anti-Pornography Bill they were harassed by the FPI's allies, the Betawi Brotherhood Forum (FBR).

The Front Pembela Islam helped to organize mass rallies in favor of the repressive bill, which would have destroyed the tourist trade in places such as Bali, and would have discriminated against Hindus, Christians and the indigenous peoples of West Papua. The bill was "watered down" in February 2007 but it appears not to have been fully introduced into law.

Current Problems

The potential "civil war" 'between moderate and hardline Muslims that has been highlighted by the Ahmadiyah/FPI problems reflects a more basic struggle - the struggle between Islamism and democracy. The current government is not, it seems, prepared to alienate or antagonize the Islamist minority. As a result, it has chosen to make the lives of a peaceful group - the Ahmadiyahs - more difficult. Faced with widespread demands to ban or outlaw the Front Pembela Islam, the government of Indonesia does nothing.

Many of the leading Islamists in Indonesia - Umar Jaffar Thalib of the Laskar Jihad, Abu Bakar Bashir who is spiritual leader of the terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah and Habib Rizieq Shahib are of Arabic descent. They do not value Indonesia's cultural diversity, and do not value either the Pancasila principles or the 1945 constitution.

There are many in the Indonesian military who appear happy for the country to have democracy break down so they can gain power under martial rule. The current president, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, appears to have no desire to uphold the principles of the constitution. He will be fighting a presidential election next year. When in 2004 he was elected, it was believed that Yudhoyono was firm in a time of crisis. That firmness is no longer visible. He has vacillated while others in his government, including the Attorney General Hendarman Supanji, have sought to remove Indonesia's democratic foundations.

Yudhoyono has become weak in the face of Islamic activism. In 2003, he wooed women voters with his voice, producing an album of love songs entitled "My longing for you." Such a stunt now will do him no favors in the 2009 elections. He has bowed down to Islamist pressure, and failed to uphold his nation's democracy and constitution. He has even apparently become hoodwinked by a mountebank who claimed to have a scheme to make energy from water.

While Islamist bylaws were being introduced across Indonesia, sometimes following pressure from the Front Pembela Islam, Yudhoyono's government did nothing. According to legal expert Denny Indrayana, sharia-based bylaws can be revoked by presidential decree: ""Based on Law No. 32/2004, the government can make a decision 60 days after local administrations give bylaws for review."

The recent decision to severely curtail the activities of the peaceful and law-abiding citizens in the Ahmadiyah movement has struck a sour note inside Indonesia and beyond. Already the group has suffered persecution in West Java and on the island of Lombok. Between 2005 and 2008 at least 25 Ahmadiyah mosques have been destroyed.

The decree has been criticized by Islamists such as Abu Bakar Bashir because it is not a complete disbandment of the Ahmadiyah. Human Rights Watch condemned the move and urged the Indonesian government to uphold the pluralist values of the constitution.

Adnan Buyung Nasution is a prominent lawyer who acts as an advisor to President Yudhoyono. He said: "I would say this is the beginning of a further war between Indonesians who want to maintain a secular state, an open democratic society, and those who want to dominate (and turn) the country into a Muslim country."

The Indonesian rights group Kontras has also condemned the decree. Usman Hamid, coordinator of Kontras has said: "The government has not been able to protect citizens from violence, from prosecutions committed by hard-line groups. This is a serious, serious problem in Indonesia... we have been able to achieve several political reforms, political freedom. But the case of Ahmadiyah undermines the image of reform even more starkly because religious freedom has been attacked after 10 years of reform in Indonesia."

The ideological war that is being fought now in Indonesia is between two diametrically opposed systems - Islamism and democracy. So far, the Islamists appear to be winning.

# #
Adrian Morgan is a British based writer and artist who has written for Western Resistance since its inception. He also writes for Spero News. He has previously contributed to various publications, including the Guardian and New Scientist and is a former Fellow of the Royal Anthropological Society.

http://www.familyse curitymatters. org/publications /id.315/pub_ detail.asp

Indonesia-The Most Populous Muslim Nation

2008-07-22T23:13:00.000-07:00

Exclusive: Indonesia - A Civil War Between Islamists And Moderates?: Part One of Two

By: Adrian Morgan

Indonesia is widely described as a "moderate" Islamic nation. In many ways this has been true. Recently, however, a conflict has been brewing between those who support moderate interpretations of Islam and those who support hardline and intolerant forms. This conflict has even been seen by some commentators to be pushing Indonesia to the very brink of a civil war. Today and tomorrow, I will try to explain the background of this conflict, whose causes belong as much to politics as they do to religion.

Indonesia is certainly the most populous Muslim nation in the world. Its total population is around 235 million, with 85% of this figure being Muslim. The official language (Bahasa Indonesia) is a version of Malay, but other regional tongues exist on various islands.

As an archipelago, Indonesia comprises a total of 17,508 islands, many of which were part of the Dutch East Indies. Indonesia sought independence from the Netherlands immediately following World War II. After 1949, the Dutch accepted Indonesia as a nation.

The first ruler of Indonesia was Sukarno, who had declared independence in August 1945. He was overthrown in a coup led by General Suharto (Soeharto), who ruled from March 1968 until he was forced to resign in May 1998. Under Suharto's rule, there was widespread corruption. Suharto's son Tommy (Hutomo Mandala Putra) grew rich from embezzlement. Even when he was found guilty of the murder of Syaifuddin Kartasasita (the judge who convicted him of corruption), Tommy Suharto only served four years in jail.

The current president of Indonesia is Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono who has been in power since 2004. His government has been weak when dealing with the demands of Islamists. During Yudhoyono's presidency many areas of Indonesia have introduced bylaws which enforce Islamist laws. These laws were introduced following pressure from Islamist groups such as the Front Pembela Islam (Islamic Defender's Front). Even though these bylaws are unconstitutional, Yudhoyonyo is either too politically weak or indifferent to oppose them.

During the three decades that Suharto was in power, Islamist groups and movements were, along with communist groups, viciously suppressed. With Indonesia being comprised of varying cultural groups, the influence of totalitarians such as communists or religious supremacists would naturally lead to conflict.

Two groups came into existence following the end of Suharto's rule. The strident Islamism expressed by these groups has threatened to destroy the values of religious tolerance and pluralism that are promised by the constitution (called "Pancasila") of Indonesia. Article 29, b, of the Indonesian constitution reads: "The State guarantees all persons the freedom of worship, each according to his/her own religion or belief."

Both of these Islamist groups are said to have tacit support from senior figures within the military as well as the judiciary and police.

Laskar Jihad

Laskar Jihad (Lashkar Jihad) was led by Jaffar Umar Thalib. This group, which allegedly was formed with the approval of members of the military and the government in 2000, was the main instigator of sectarian violence during the Moluccan War which lasted from the end of 1998 until 2002. This war pitted fanatical Islamists against Christians and at least 9,000 people, mostly Christian, were killed. The fighting was worst on the large island of Sulawesi and in the Moluccan islands (the Spice Islands).

Thalib urged his followers to wage an attack upon Christian villagers in Soya on the island of Ambon. On Friday April 26, 2002, Thalib spoke to Laskar Jihad followers outside Ambon's biggest mosque. He urged a religious war against Christians, saying: "From today, we will no longer talk about reconciliation. Our ... focus now must be preparing for war - ready your guns, spears and daggers." Two days later, Laskar Jihad invaded the mainly Christian village of Soya on Ambon Island. Men, women and children were stabbed, beaten to death, burned and decapitated. Even babies did not escape machete attacks.

The Soya massacre took place even though other Islamist groups had signed a peace deal with Christians on February 12, 2002. This deal was called the Malino Accord. It was brokered by Yusuf Kalla (who is now the vice president of Indonesia), and was intended to put an end to the Moluccan War. Laskar Jihad refused to acknowledge the terms of the Malino Accord.

Thalib's vigilantes had also driven away Christian landowners in Malaku province, sharing their lands as "booty" among Laskar Jihad and Muslims from outside the province.

Thalib himself had fought Soviets in Afghanistan from 1988 to 1989 and had met Osama bin Laden. He had been educated at the Mawdudi Institute in Lahore, Pakistan, before dropping out and joining the Afghan Mujahideen. He ran an Islamic boarding school (pesantren) called Ihya'us Sunnah Tadribud Du'at on the large island of Java. Thalib allegedly supervised an illegal Shari'a court which stoned a man to death, but though he was arrested for this, Thalib was never prosecuted. Following the Soya atrocity, Thalib was prosecuted for inciting religious violence but bizarrely, he was acquitted.

Laskar Jihad announced it was officially disbanding in October 2002, but in 2003 it was waging war against the native peoples of West Papua. This territory - the Western end of New Guinea was never ceded by the Dutch, and was annexed by Indonesia in 1963, and officially recognized by the UN as "Indonesian" in 1969. Very few indigenous West Papuans consider themselves to be Muslim.

FPI - The Islamic Defenders Group

While Laskar Jihad continues to operate in secret, away from the prying eyes of the media, the Front Pembela Islam has been blatantly courting publicity.

The Front Pembela Islam or Islamic Defenders Front was founded in August 1998, only three months after Suharto was ousted from power. The uniformed members of this group in their white jackets and hats appear indistinguishable from the vigilantes of Laskar Jihad. Their motives are the same - to impose a strict interpretation of Islam as the sole religion of Islam and to ignore or destroy the rights of those they deem to be non-Muslims.

The BBC stated in 2003 of the FPI: "Unlike other groups it is not fighting for an Islamic state, but it does want to establish strict Sharia law." Yet its subsequent actions in enforcing Islamist local bylaws to be imposed on all citizens, including non-Muslims, belie the BBC's claims.

At the time the group had claimed that it was suspending its activities, while its founder was awaiting trial for inciting his followers to carry out raids on social establishments.

The founder of the group is Al Habib Muhammad Rizieq bin Hussein Shihab, more commonly described as Habib Rizieq Shihab. From its inception, the FPI began to make its presence felt in the main cities of Indonesia. During the holy month Ramadan, members of the group would attack bars and clubs that were seen to be flouting the conventions of Islam. In 2001 he organized a series of attacks against American interests, targeting businesses he believed were supportive of, or funded by, the United States.

Even though Saudi-educated Habib Rizieq Shihab could have received seven years for inciting his followers to violence, when he was found guilty, he was only jailed for seven months. Upon his release from Salemba Penitentiary in Central Jakarta on November 19, 2003, the FPI became more intransigent. The group, according to the now-defunct MITP Terrorism Knowledge Base, apparently funds itself via extortion from businesses.

In October 2004 during Ramadan, hundreds of FPI members attacked a restaurant and bar in the south of Jakarta, Indonesia's capital city. They also raided a pool hall. Apparently when the attacks took place, police who were nearby took no action against the vigilantes.

Though there is little to distinguish them from the core group, the paramilitary wing of FPI, which carries out the raids on bars, is known as the Laskar Pembela Islam (Islam Defenders' Army). The FPI as a whole now has a total of 200,000 members who are based in at least 22 of Indonesia's 33 provinces.

On December 24, 2004, a massive tsunami devastated the province of Aceh, located on the northwestern tip of Sumatra Island. Relief workers came to the area to assist in the amelioration of the local population's plight. A less positive addition to the relief work was the arrival of Islamist groups. These included the Laskar Mujahideen which had been involved with killing Christians in the Moluccan War. Additionally the Indonesian Muhajideen Council, whose spiritual head is the controversial cleric Abu Bakakr Bashir, arrived, as well as the Front Pembela Islam.

The arrival or Islamist groups had been spurred on by a decision by the largest group of Indonesian clerics to make a grim announcement. On January 14, 2005, the Majelis Ulama Indonesia (Indonesia Ulemas Council or MUI) warned that there would be a Muslim backlash if any of the Christian relief workers in the tsunami-devastated region of Aceh attempted to proselytize.

Fox News reported on January 21, 2005 on the intimidation of relief workers in Aceh by Islamists: "Hasri Husan, a leader of the Islamic Defenders Front, a militant Muslim group that is operating a refugee camp in Banda Aceh, made his feelings clear. 'We will chase down any Christian group that does anything beyond offering aid,' he said before making a slashing motion across his throat'"

In July 2005, the Majelis Ulama Indonesia made a "fatwa" containing 11 decrees, which decried activities involving interfaith, pluralist and "liberal" thought. The fatwa declared that liberal interpretations of Islam, secularism and pluralism were un-Islamic and therefore forbidden. This ruling was seen by some as generating a climate of intolerance in Indonesia.

On September 21, 2005 a community of Ahmadis was attacked in Sukadana in West Java. No individuals were hurt, but a mob of 1,000 fanatical Muslims carrying swords and sharpened bamboo stakes ran through the village. At least 70 homes and six mosques were badly damaged. Only five people were arrested. The attack upon the Ahmadi sect in 2005 mirrors very closely recent events that have taken place in Indonesia.

In October 2005, Strategy Page reported that: "Armed men claiming to belong to organizations like the "Islamic Defender Front" continue to attack Christians, threatening to burn down houses and kill people if, in one instance, Catholics do not stop holding prayer services in their homes."

The Ahmadiyah or Ahmadiyya are Muslims, but they are treated by orthodox Islam as heretics. They revere the founder of their sect, Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (1835-1908). As many Ahmadi believe their fonder was a prophet, they are treated as heretics. They are barred from entering Mecca for the Haj pilgrimage, and in Pakistan blasphemy laws prevent them from proselytizing. In Bangladesh, political parties in the last coalition government supported attacks against the sect.

In January of this year, the MUI (Indonesia Ulemas Council) declared that the Ahmadi sect was "deviant." On Thursday January 3, 2008 a group claiming to represent 50 Islamic organizations petitioned the attorney-general of Indonesia, demanding that the Ahmadiyyah be abolished. The two main national Muslim groups, Nahdlatul Ulama and Muhammadiyah, apparently also supported the motion. These have respectively 40 million and 30 million members. The Indonesian Muslim Brotherhood (GPMI) sent Ahmad Sumargono as a delegate.

On Sunday April 20th this year, thousands of Muslims marched in Jakarta, demanding that the Ahmadiyah sect be banned. A statement read: "We call on President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono to immediately issue a presidential decree disbanding the Ahmadiyyah organization, confiscate its assets and demand its members and followers to disband and return to the true teachings of Islam."

Instead of demanding that such calls to ban any religious group were in contravention of the terms expressed in the constitution, the president did nothing. A few days before the April 20th march, a government-sponsore d committee had agreed that the Ahmadiyah were "deviant" and recommended that the group be officially abolished. The decision was approved by the attorney-general's office.

This is not the first time that President Yudhoyono has stood by while his government acts in ways that contradict the constitution. In March 2006, one of his ministers openly condemned the Ahmadi. Maftuh Basyuni, the Indonesian Minister of Religious Affairs (pictured), had said that the Ahmadiyah sect should discontinue calling itself "Islamic" and should declare itself as a new religion altogether, adding; "If they refuse to do so, they should return to Islam by renouncing their beliefs."

A month later, the minister repeated his comments on April 17th. A group calling itself National Alliance for Freedom of Religion and Faith (AKKBB) demanded that Maftuh Basyuni within a week or face legal consequences. The minister ignored the deadline. Basyuni was educated in Saudi Arabia and appears to share that nation's contempt for "deviant" forms of Islam.

A complaint was registered with the police against Maftuh Basyuni for "insulting and slandering.. . the members of the Ahmadiyah community," but no action appears to have been taken against him. Basyuni remains employed as Religious Affairs Minister in Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's government.

The Religious Affairs Minister's comments against the Ahmadiyah had come at a particularly sensitive time. In February 2006, a month before, a community of Ahmadis had been physically attacked on the island of Lombok, adjoining Bali. Almost 200 Ahmadis had been forced to live as refugees. One said of the minister's comments: "It's ridiculous to suggest that we form a new religion. We are Muslims who pray five times a day, fast during Ramadan, and believe in the same Quran." 187 Ahmadi refugees later discussed claiming asylum in Australia.

This year, the Indonesian government has allowed the resentments between orthodox Muslims and those they deem to be heretical to reach dangerously tense levels.

On the morning of April 28th this year, a mob of 300 individuals attacked an Ahmadi mosque in Sukabumi district in West Java. The mosque was burned to the ground. Three days earlier, a group of Muslim activists grouped outside the mosque demanding it remove any mention of Islam from its sign board.

On the afternoon of Sunday June 1, 2008, the National Alliance for Freedom of Religion and Faith (AKKBB) held a rally in Jakarta to support the right of the Ahmadiyah sect to exist, free from persecution. The date was significant - as it was a national holiday called Pancasila Day.

"Pancasila", the principle of the constitution, means literally "five principles", which are these:

1) Belief in one supreme God
2) A just and civilized humanity
3) Nationalism, the unity of Indonesia
4) Democracy guided by the wisdom of unanimity arising from discussion (musjawarah) and mutual assistance (gotong royong)
5) Social justice, the equality of political rights and the rights of citizenship, as well as social and cultural equality

The Front Pembela Islam was also holding a rally on the same day, to protest against fuel price rises. The two groups met at Monas Square, where the National Monument is situated. Here the FPI launched an attack upon the members of the National Alliance for Freedom of Religion and Faith using bamboo sticks. Seventy people were injured, with seven of these seriously wounded. Witnesses claimed that members of the FPI had shouted: "If you are defending Ahmadiyya, you must be killed."

On the following day President Yudhoyono awake from his political torpor to condemn the attacks made by the Front Pembela Islam. There were calls from inside the country and abroad for the FPI to be abolished.

Habib Rizieq Shihab had no remorse about the incident at Monas Square. He appeared before reporters and openly told his followers on June 2nd to prepare for war. He said: "I have ordered all members of the Islamic Force to prepare for war against the Ahmadiyah (sect) and their supporters. We will never accept the arrest of a single member of our force before the government disbands Ahmadiyah. We will fight until our last drop of blood." He added: "We will not accept Islam to be defiled by anyone. I prefer to be in prison or even be killed than accepting Islam to be defiled."

On Wednesday last week 58 members of the Front Pembela Islam were arrested from their headquarters in Central Jakarta. Habib Rizieq Shihab accompanied the arrested individuals as they were taken to a police station. There, he too was arrested. One individual among FPI's leadership called Munarman is still on the run.

The Indonesian police have finally acted to put a stop to the FPI, a group that has been openly practicing violence and intimidation. The actions come too little and too late. The current government has vacillated while extremists have eroded people's basic rights and freedoms, and now the country is in danger of succumbing to violence.

In Part Two, I will show how the Indonesian authorities have colluded with violent forces, rather than confront them head-on. In some instances, it appears that the government and the military have deliberately encouraged a climate of tension and potential conflict.

Ahmadiyah and Hizbut Tahrir

2008-07-22T22:52:00.002-07:00

Comparing the Ahmadiyah and the Hizbut Tahrir

*Bramantyo Prijosusilo* , Ngawi, East Java | Wed, 04/16/2008 12:31 PM |
Opinion

Followers of Ahmadiyah believe their leaders are rightly guided Caliphs and
their congregations of faithfuls constitute a Caliphate. The Hizb ut Tahrir
al Islami (the Islamic Party of Liberation, HT for short) is also
preoccupied with the idea of a Caliphate, a State with its own constitution,
armed forces and geographical boundaries.

Where as the Ahmadiyah seek to convert people into believing in the Ahmadi
version of Islam, which maintains Mirza Gulam Ahmad was the promised
Messiah, the HT also attempts to convert people into believing their own
version of Islam, which prescribes the struggle to establish a physical
Caliphate as a *wajib*, or fundamental obligation, for Muslims.

Both peculiarities are unique to their groups and represent a 'deviation'
from the traditional mainstream Islamic thought. HT was founded in 1953 in
Jerusalem by Taqiuddin al-Nabhani, and is banned in many Islamic countries
but has supporters in high places in Jakarta. Ahmadiyah is also banned in
many countries and has no open supporters among the elite in Indonesia.

Although Islamic traditions state the Messiah will descend sometime before
the end of the world, not many Muslims believe he has already arrived and
departed in the form of Mirza Gulam Ahmad in India before its partition.

Similarly, although Islamic tradition does note early Muslims after the
death of the Prophet were organized under the banner of a Caliphate, most
Muslims also believe the establishing of a Caliphate is not a religious
duty, and that any form of State is fine as long as it promotes justice and
allows the practices of Islam and doesn't prosecute Muslims because of their
faith.

Most modern Muslims believe secular democracy is better than any form of
government yet invented and refer to the process of electing Abu Bakar as
the first Caliph after the Prophet's death as the precedence for democracy
in Islam.

Of course, there are some fundamental differences between the Ahmadiyah and
the HT. The main difference is the HT aims to establish a political
Caliphate.

Everywhere the HT is active, it denounces democracy as a Western vice. A
glance through HT websites impresses upon the reader a hatred for Jews and
the West, who are portrayed as evil controllers of the world that can only
be dealt with through the establishment of a Caliphate. In contrast, the
Ahmadiyah websites proclaim their motto "Love for all, hatred for none" and
do not aim to overthrow any government or form any State whatsoever.

Both the Ahmadiyah and the HT are prosecuted and banned in many countries,
but for different reasons. The HT is banned in many Middle Eastern countries
because it is hostile toward the governments and aims to overthrow the
State. In some European Union countries, the HT is banned because it breeds
anti-Semitic and extremist views, and several European terrorists were found
to have links to the HT and to possess substantial amounts of HT literature.
The Ahmadiyah are banned in some Islamic countries because they are judged
as deviating from 'true' Islam, especially in their faith in Mirza Gulam
Ahmad being the promised Messiah.

In Indonesia, the MUI organization of clerics has called for the Ahmadiyah
to be banned, and several Islamic organizations have viciously attacked and
closed down Ahmadiyah mosques. The Indonesian chapter of the HT, in
contrast, enjoys tacit support from some ministers and overt support from
hard organizations.

One might be tempted to ask, if Ahmadiyah preaches love for all and hatred
for no one, and HT preaches hatred for democracy and calls for the overthrow
of existing States, why is it that in Indonesia, the establishment is more
worried about Ahmadiyah than it is concerned about the anti-democracy
ideology of the HT? Why are there cabinet ministers who overtly and tacitly
support the anti-democracy, theocratic, ideology that aims to overthrow the
State to replace it with their version of a Caliphate? Does that not sound
like hypocrisy?

Further more, one might want to examine whether HT's version of establishing
a Caliphate is truly as Islamic as they claim. Though HT activists are
taught their strategy is to follow the example of the Prophet, many
ex-activists, such as the British writer Ed Husain have pointed out that HT
has a lot to thank Lenin and Trotsky for. While Muhammad taught a religion,
HT seeks political power using Leninist methods. The HT goes on and adopts a
Trotskyist, internationalist vision.

Maybe because Lenin's thoughts have for decades been banned here, no one has
actually pointed out the Leninism in HT's methods, because no one is sure
what Leninism is. The HT seeks, just like the Bolsheviks, to firstly develop
a core of firm believers that communicate clear and simple slogans to the
masses, and when the time ripens, one day seize power and establish their
Caliphate (Soviet).

Then from that Caliphate, like falling dominoes, their ideology will spread
throughout Islamdom. Eventually the Caliphate will convert the whole world
through jihad and da'wah. Just because they wrap their Leninist ideas in
Islamic jargon it doesn't mean that Leninism isn't there. The rank and file
of the HT is unlikely to be aware of their debt to Lenin but a debt there
certainly is.

Both the Ahmadiyah and HT seek to convert people to believing their version
of Islam, but while the first is concerned with the spiritual aspect of
life, the second is concerned with the political aspect. One would be happy
to see the Republic of Indonesia prosper and flourish, while the other would
succeed only once it had overthrown the Republic and established a Caliphate
in its place. Which is more dangerous for the nation?

News

2008-05-22T21:07:00.001-07:00

Ban will justify crimes against Ahmadiyah: UN

The Jakarta Post , Jakarta | Thu, 05/22/2008 11:26 AM | National

The United Nations Committee against Torture (UNCAT) has recommended Indonesia drop its plan to outlaw Ahmadiyah, saying the ban will legitimize crimes against members of the Islamic sect.

The committee's recommendation, made at a UNCAT hearing in Geneva on May 16, noted the failure of Indonesian security forces and authorities to provide Ahmadiyah members with adequate protection or to conduct prompt, impartial and effective investigations into the recent violence against sect members.

The committee also urged Indonesia to give prompt consideration to increasing the number of recruits from ethnic and religious minorities in law enforcement.

The Ahmadiyah case has prompted the committee to request its special rapporteur on religion to visit Indonesia. The committee asked the Indonesian government to respond favorably to the plan and allow the rapporteur to enter the country, in order to help deal with cases of violence against the Ahmadiyah community.

Director of Indonesian Human Rights Watch (Imparsial), Poengky Indarti, who attended the committee hearing, said Wednesday the committee expressed deep concern about the Ahmadiyah case because it was related to violence and violation of freedom of religion.

"The committee fears freedom of religion in Indonesia is now in a poor state," Poengky said.

In 1981, the Indonesian Ulema Council issued an edict declaring Ahmadiyah heretical. Since then followers of the Islamic sect have come under repeated attacks.

Hundreds of members of the Ahmadiyah community have been displaced since 2002, when residents of Lombok Island in West Nusa Tenggara raided their homes.

In 2005, about 12,000 Ahmadiyah members were attacked when they were holding an annual meeting at Mubarak College in Parung, Bogor. Sixteen people were wounded. Less than a week later, two houses of Ahmadiyah members near the college were damaged.

The Coordinating Board for Monitoring Mystical Beliefs in Society (Bakor Pakem) has recommended the ban of Ahmadiyah on the grounds its teachings deviate from orthodox Islam.

The government was still undecided Wednesday whether to issue a decree outlawing Ahmadiyah.

Rafendi Djamin of Indonesian NGO Coalition for International Human Rights Advocacy urged the government to resolve the Ahmadiyah case within one year.

"It is obligatory for the government to resolve the issue because we have ratified some international conventions to uphold human rights," he said.

During the next four years, Rafendi said, Indonesia also had to resolve the issues of human rights violations, including finding those responsible for the murder of rights activist Munir Said Thalib, bringing military officers to justice for violence in conflict areas, forming solid regulations on violence against women and producing a clearer juvenile justice system. (nkn)

News Space

2008-05-05T17:37:00.000-07:00

Government told to disband board over Ahmadiyah ban

The Jakarta Post , Jakarta, Bandung, Mataram Tue, 05/06/2008 12:35 PM Headlines

The government is being urged to disband its interdepartmental board that recently recommended a ban on Jamaah Ahmadiyah, as protests have continued in support of the Islamic sect.

"We demand the government dissolve the Coordinating Board for Monitoring Mystical Beliefs in Society (Bakor Pakem) immediately because the board is no longer relevant for today," Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI) research director Zainal Abidin told The Jakarta Post on Monday.

"The board is one of the New Order regime's products and it tends to limit citizens' freedom. In today's context, the government should not interfere in citizens' political and social issues.

"People have their rights and freedom to carry out religious activities," he said.

Zainal said the YLBHI may take legal action against Bakor Pakem for limiting the freedom of expression of Ahmadiyah members.

"We still see the possibility of filing a lawsuit against the board," Zainal said.

On April 16, Bakor Pakem, which consists of senior officials from the Attorney General's Office, the Religious Affairs Ministry, the Home Ministry and the National Police, announced a ban on Ahmadiyah for heresy.

Bakor Pakem said that during a three-month evaluation of 55 Ahmadiyah communities across the country, it found the sect failed to commit to the 12 points of its public declaration signed in January.

The declaration included acknowledging the Prophet Muhammad, instead of Mirza Gulam Ahmad, as the last prophet in Islam, as believed by mainstream Muslims worldwide.

Hard-line groups renewed attacks on Ahmadiyah following the board's recommendation.

The YLBHI also urged the government to take concrete measures to ensure acts of violence would not recur.

"The state is responsible for protecting all citizens, including Ahmadiyah members, from any threats and fears," Zainal said.

Some organizations showed their support Monday for Ahmadiyah.

In Bandung, West Java, about 25 organizations staged a rally demanding the government refrain from interfering with citizens' freedom. They also called on Bakor Pakem to withdraw its recommendation.

Protest participant Zaki Firdaus said the ban would put Ahmadiyah members under increasing pressure, especially in the case of children attending state schools.

"The teachers always say Ahmadiyah is forbidden in the country and its members are infidels. These statements have led to high pressure for children," Zaki said.

In Mataram, dozens of organizations under the National Alliance for Tolerance (AKUR) also held a similar protest.

The alliance did not only reject the anti-Ahmadiyah recommendation, but also urged moderate Muslim organizations like Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), Muhammadiyah and Nahdlatul Wathan (NW) to overcome differences among them and help cancel the ban.

The AKUR asked police to protect Ahmadiyah refugees living in limbo at the Transito Mataram House.

"Many Ahmadiyah members have stayed in Transito without having any proper facilities, including security, health and education for their children. The ban will worsen their conditions," said protest coordinator Taufiqurrahman.

The West Nusa Tenggara government should give Ahmadiyah members necessary protection and send them back to their hometowns, he added. (trw)

Yuli Tri Suwarni and Panca Nugraha contributed to this story from Bandung and Mataram, respectively

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/05/06/government-told-disband-board-over-ahmadiyah-ban.html

Best Seller

2008-04-05T21:37:00.000-07:00

Al Quran Kitab Toleransi

Islam sebagai agama yang datang paling akhir mempunyai pandangan yang relative komprehensif tentang pentingnya cinta-kasih. Islam adalah agama yang meletakkan ajarannya tidak hanya untuk kalangan Muslim, tetapi juga untuk menusia di seantero dunia. Ajaran tentang cinta-kasih telah menjadi landasan yang menyebabkan Islam menjadi agama yang berada pada garda depan untuk mengusung kemanusiaan. Cinta-kasih merupakan ruh yang akan menjadikan sebuah komunitas agama menghargai agama yang lain, karena dalam cinta-kasih yang menjadi panglima adalah solidaritas dan kesetaraan sebagai manusia, makhluk Tuhan.

Dalam hal ini, umat Islam mempunyai tanggungjawab yang besar untuk menghadirkan ajaran cinta-kasih dari sumber yang paling otoritatif dalam khazanah Islam, yaitu al-Quran. Sebagaimana dijelaskan secara panjang lebar diatas, bahwa al-Quran dalam kapasitasnya sebagai Kitab yang membawa keistimewaan, mutiara dan kemanusiaan universal, maka pembacaan yang mendalam terhadap al-Quran amat diperlukan. Membedah al-Quran merupakan salah satu upaya alternative untuk menemukan kembali ajaran cinta-kasih, yang sebenarnya sudah dilakukan para ulama terdahulu.
Al-Quran yang diyakini oleh umat Islam sebagai pedoman hidup, sudah semestinya dipahami untuk membumikan toleransi. Tentu saja, harus diimani pula, baha ajaran cinta-kasih merupakan ajaran yang inheren dalam agama-agama samawi terdahulu. Apa yang disampaikan al-Quran, pada hakikatnya hendak menyempurnakan dan melanjutkan ajaran yang mulia tersebut. Karena itu,meletakkan toleransi sebagai nilai utama dalam keberagaman umat Islam merupakan salah satu upaya menghindarkan sesuatu yang fundamental dalam Islam.

Zuhairi Misrawi, Al-Quran Kitab Toleransi-Inklusivisme,Pluralisme dan Multikulturalisme, [Jakarta: Fitrah,cet.I ,2007, hal.229]

Demikian tadi cuplikan paragraph dari sebuah buku yang sangat monumental,tegas,jelas dan lugas dalam mendengungkan toleransi si muka bumi. Tidak tanggung-tanggung buku ini menghadirkan kata pengantar dari KH. Abdurrahman Wahid dan Prof.Dr.Ahmad Syafii Ma'arif. Untuk lebih menyelami kedalaman isi buku ini silahkan membelinya di toko-toko buku terdekat.
Atau kontak ke Email penerbit :penerbit_fitrah@hotmail.com, HP: 081806607139

Dialogue with Gus Dur

2008-04-05T11:29:00.000-07:00

Meeting and Discussion with Gus Dur about Tolerance in Islam (Islam is the peaceful religion)

Audiences from Islam,Christian,Catholik,Budha,Hindu,Sikh,Bahai, and the other religions too

Prophet Model for Muslims

2008-04-05T02:03:00.000-07:00

Prophet model for Muslims

By :Fazal-e-Mujeeb

No Muslim can negate the fact that the Prophet Muhammad’s life is full of such incidents where he was mocked and ill-treated. But he always showed patience and tolerance. He never took revenge for these personal insults, rather he prayed for his enemies. This is why all muslims are proud of him, because he always forgave even his worse enemies.

Since the time of the Prophet, Muslims have come across many a blasphemous incident against their beloved Prophet. These include the recent incidents of the caricatures in a newspaper and drawing competition in Denmark.
As holy Prophet once said, “Filth does not clean filth.”
Muslims should react very maturely in dealing with such incidents. Violent reactions out of anger may quench the thirst for revenge for a while, but eventually it will backfire on muslims as a whole.
Islam as a religion will get a bad name from violent reactionts and vested forces, ultimately, will benefit from this. In such crucial situations this saying of the Prophet is worth remembering: “The strong wrestler is not he who defeats his opponent, but the one who got full control over himself during his anger.”
There are so many peaceful ways to convey grievances. One of them is to try to show the world the true picture of Islam and its Prophet. For this, Muslims all over the world may hold “Seerat-un-Nabi” (roughly means, beuty of the character of the Prophet) conferences, where the real beauty of Islamic teachings should be highlighted and noble examples of the holy Prophet focused on. And most importantly oh all, Muslims should truly copy their role model in everyday life. This may help those who insult the Prophet because of their lack of knowledge of Islam change their view.